Despite the fact that Fiji is one of only a handful of states to have given constitutionalrecognition to the rights of sexual minorities in its most recent constitutionenacted in 1998, controversy over the issue of individual sexual orientation, andpowerful condemnation of those who choose to publicly demonstrate a homosexualor transgender identity, has fl ourished in the public domain. The focus onmale homosexuality has been predominant in this debate, with many infl uentialpolitical actors framing discourses of masculinity in ways that affi rm Christianideals of morality while also reinforcing the Christian Church’s normative politicalauthority. However, as this article demonstrates, public discourses of masculinityhave also been articulated in a highly selective manner. This becomes clear whenpublic debate that construes homosexuality in Fiji as a threat to the integrity ofthe country’s key social institutions is contrasted with some church and politicalleaders’ far more lenient responses to the forms of violent and lawless masculinebehavior that predominated during the 2000 coup. While these developmentshave increased the political and social vulnerability of Fiji’s homosexuals, younggay men have also employed strategies that contest mainstream discriminatoryattitudes. In this article, I describe how the terrain of sexual minority politics isconfi gured in ways that authorize certain varieties of masculine behavior and subordinateothers, and consider the strategies deployed by local gay males to contesthomophobic sentiments articulated in the public domain.